Recent survey data from the Pew Research Center finds a public that is deeply divided over the role marriage plays in society. Survey respondents were asked which of the following statements came closer to their own views: Society is better off if people make marriage and having children a priority, or society is just as well off if people have priorities other than marriage and children. Some 46% of adults chose the first statement, while 50% chose the second.4

Opinions on this issue differ sharply by age—with young adults much more likely than older adults to say society is just as well off if people have priorities other than marriage and children. Fully two-thirds of those ages 18 to 29 (67%) express this viewpoint, as do 53% of those ages 30 to 49. Among those ages 50 and older, most (55%) say society is better off if people make it a priority to get married and have children.

But the survey also finds that, among the never married, men and women are looking for distinctly different qualities in a potential mate. Never-married women place a great deal of importance on finding someone who has a steady job—fully 78% say this would be very important to them in choosing a spouse or partner. For never-married men, someone who shares their ideas about raising children is more important in choosing a spouse than someone who has a steady job.

Never-married adults—whether male or female—place a much lower priority on finding a partner who shares their moral and religious beliefs, has a similar educational pedigree or comes from the same racial or ethnic background.

Among those who have never been married but say they may eventually like to wed, three-in-ten say the main reason they are not married is that they have not found someone who has what they are looking for in a spouse. Nearly as many (27%) say they are not financially prepared for marriage, and 22% say they are too young or not ready to settle down. There are no significant differences between never-married men and women in this regard.

Never-Married Adults Face Changing Economic Realities

As the share of never-married adults has climbed, the economic circumstances faced by both men and women have changed considerably. Labor force participation among men—particularly young men—has fallen significantly over the past several decades. In 1960, 93% of men ages 25 to 34 were in the labor force; by 2012 that share had fallen to 82%. And among young men who are employed, wages have fallen over the past few decades. For men ages 25 to 34, median hourly wages have declined 20% since 1980 (after adjusting for inflation). Over the same period, the wage gap between men and women has narrowed. In 2012, among workers ages 25 to 34, women’s hourly earnings were 93% those of men. In 1980, the ratio was less than 70%.6

The new Pew Research survey findings suggest that never-married women place a high premium on finding a spouse with a steady job. However, the changes in the labor market have contributed to a shrinking pool of available employed young men.

Among never-married adults ages 25 to 34, the number of employed men per 100 women dropped from 139 in 1960 to 91 in 2012, despite the fact that men in this age group outnumber young women in absolute numbers. In other words, if all never-married young women in 2012 wanted to find a young employed man who had also never been married, 9% of them would fail, simply because there are not enough men in the target group. Five decades ago, never-married young women had a much larger pool of potential spouses from which to choose.7

Despite the survey finding that few Americans say it is very important to them to find someone of the same racial or ethnic background to marry, the vast majority of new marriages (85%) take place between people of the same race and ethnicity.8 The pool of employed men has shrunk for both black and white young adults since 1960, but the decline has been more pronounced among blacks.

It is important to note that never-married young adults are not necessarily restricting their choice of a potential spouse to those who have never been married, nor are they limited to a spouse within their age group. Among all unmarried adults ages 25 to 34 in 2012, 15% have been divorced, separated or widowed, and these men and women are potentially in the marriage market as well.

The relationship between education and marital status has changed considerably over time, and the patterns among men and women have reversed. In 1960, men of various education levels were about equally likely to have never been married. Today, there is considerable disparity in the shares of never-married men along educational lines. Men with a high school education or less are much more likely than men with advanced degrees to have never married (25% vs. 14%).

April 14, 2014

Like it or not this is the age we live in. Everything is impersonal. You don’t even have a banker or a grocer anymore. For the task of finding someone is become the same, impersonal and it can be complicated. If you are not a church going person, you are private and not into bars and constant get togethers like you were on AA or visit to your probation class and to top it off you like to shop quickly because you only buy for one; My friend that means you are going to spend the rest of your life alone or you will learn online dating. It can work but you will need help to come out alive with two balls in their sac or the ovaries where they belong if you are a he or.she. This is advice on getting the task of not finding the wrong guy which is more important than finding the right guy in my opinion. These tips are from my experience and from reading what current experts in dating are saying

Adam Gonzalez, Publisher, Editor

1. If he has no photo up. How Serious is he to meet someone? Most everyone has a picture of themselves.

2. Look at his profile carefully. If all they speak about is hooking up and sex, they might not be for you. Chances are is a “wang bang thank you man.”

3. If his profile is messy and misspelled then it was not written for you but for someone like them that they don’t give a damn.

3.Texting at the very beginning but ASAP “Phone” You will get an instant hit if they are not for you. If they don’t want tot all on the phone for so called security reasons, then what are they doing in online dating? It probably means they are closeted and do you want that. Even if you have not come out yourself, a secretive guy will make live a triple life. Yours, his and the closet.

4. If the initial contact is purely sexual is ok if you a re into that. Wether you want to reserve your cherry which probably is been popped more than once to play that game is fine as long as both are willing to play the same game and are tuned to the same station. Be plain and straight forward about that without sounding forceful either way. This might be an opportunity for someone to try to win you over with romance. Don’t expect too much but keep expectations in check.

5. If he doesn’t want to meet for the first time in public but insists in private, watch out. It is ok to meet at his or your place for the first time, but the pressure will be higher and there might be an expectation of sex. But if you are comfortable of for it.

6. This is one of the most important ones “ No chemistry” Like a dead pnis there is no CPR for that.

7. If it seems he never read your profile just saw your photo. Be attentive how he ask you questions that are on your profile. He might be verifying information you have and judging to see if you have the same answers. You will know if hasn’t read it.

8. If he is reluctant to talk about themselves on the phone.Even if they ware shy they should know themselves and only he can testify in his favor here.

9. If they are separated is ok as long as there is no connection. If not eventually he might miss his old flame and leave you burt out and tossed away.

10; The profile should match what is being said in words

11. Some people lie about their age. The important thing is to judge the person when you see him. A few years don’t matter and eventually if there was a little playing with numbers there should be a reason. For instance he wrote 30 but is 25 but explains that explains that he looks 30 and he does. Brought his age up or down to match his looks not to be a wise ass and be something he is not and doesn’t look like he is. This should be the only white lie that should be tolerated. Everything else should be the truth. The relationship should be based in truth because honesty is going to be the cornerstone that at times might be called to hold the whole package together.

12.If they don’t write anything on their profile, then they are as empty as the profile. You are being led into a a dark house without lights.

13.On a site people pay sometimes you find more serious people, but that is not guarantee by me.

14. You need to know the date of the main photo in the profile! Also all the other ones but the one that says how he loos like should not be older that 24 months. That is pushing it and if he has a pic 2 yrs old as his profile but then he has one within the year is ok. 5, 10 20 is silly and very wrong, but people sometimes put their baby pics in there like if that was supposed to say something particular about them. All babies are cute and most people have better skiing when younger unless they had a case of acne.

15.A good sense of humor is cool but making fun of you or anything of your is a big no-no. It’s a matter of the respect he has for you and wether he is a jerk off.

16. Your inner voice and intuition is going to help you. Let it also guide you. If you are getting a bad feeling there is a reason for it and is not a reason on your side.Adam Gonzalez, Publisheradamfoxie blog International

ps: If this helps you in anyways, please come back and buy something from one of the commercials in adamfoxie’s site. We are squeeze by the times in which you pay(we) for news, names, etc.

April 25, 2013

Fred Stoller, the actor known for playing goofy roles including Gerard on Everybody Loves Raymond, has opened up about a failed one-night stand he had with fellow comedian Kathy Griffin.

In his new book Maybe We'll Have You Back: The Life of a Perennial TV Guest Star, the 55-year-old talks about the disastrous fling with his Suddenly Susan co-star, which involved the redhead begging him to let her hit him in the face.

'Apparently she had just seen a TV movie about a woman who battered her husband,' the actor recalls, 'which gave her a craving to do the same.'

In his book, which was released on April 1, Mr Stoller also talks about the party in 1992 where he first met the actress, now 52. More odd behavior from the actress ensued. 'She seemed to have gone out of her way to make me miserable on our dates,' says Mr Stoller. Nonetheless, Ms Griffin apparently made no secret of her attraction to him at first.

'After some small talk I don't recall, Kathy Griffin asked me to drive her to her car where she made it easy for me to make out with her,' he writes.

The actor illustrates the peculiar moment when he picked her up for their first date, 'We stood there not even two minutes deciding what we should do, when she announced, "I'm wet,"' he recalls.

'She seemed to have gone out of her way to make me miserable on our dates'

And when the pair slept together for the first time, her penchant for violence was revealed when she asked him to let her punch him in the face.

'Why do you want to do that?' the actor asked at the time, to which Ms Griffin responded: 'I have hostility towards men. They rape, watch porn, and go to strip clubs.'

But this wasn't the only bizarre moment during their ill-fated one-night stand.

The actor says just moments after her odd request, they were lying peacefully in bed when she suddenly exclaimed: 'Stop looking at my a**!'

Mr Stoller's autobiography talks about his perennial gig as the 'guest actor' on numerous sitcoms, in which he most often plays the 'oddball character'.

His most notable roles include Gerard on Everybody Loves Raymond, Stu the waiter on Friends, and Hank on Suddenly Susan, which saw him co-starring alongside Joan Rivers, Brooke Shields and Kathy Griffin.

While he expected Ms Rivers to be 'a pampered whiny woman', he soon discovered that she was kinder than her reputation suggested.

'When I told Joan that my mother was unhappy that I was portraying "a gay," she demanded to have her phone number,' says the actor.

Instead, he found Ms Griffin to be the troublesome one on the show - which aired from 1996 to 2000 - after she constantly berated him for the way he portrayed his homosexual character.

'After rehearsals, she'd come up to me and say, '[I] see you and Bill aren't holding hands. You're being so homophobic. You should be holding his hand more,' he writes.

Mr Stoller was only on five episodes of the series, but he says even after it was cancelled, he had one last run-in with the actress.

A representative at Ruffles Potato Chips wanted him to appear in a commercial as Ms Griffin's boyfriend, he recalls in the book.

But his agent called him soon after to inform him that the actress had pulled the plug on the ad.

'Kathy nixed me from the role, because she wanted someone "more macho" playing her boyfriend,' he writes.

It's not the first time the actor - who also plays Fred the Squirrel in DreamWorks' The Penguins of Madagascar - has turned his hand to writing.

In 2012, he published an e-book entitled My Seinfeld Year, detailing his experience as a temporary staff writer on the popular show.

February 15, 2013

On television, eHarmony cofounder Neil Clark Warren seems like a pleasantly nutty character, the kind of aw-shucks senior citizen who says things like, “What I really need is a robot who can come in and talk with me” when his wife isn’t feeling chatty, and that eHarmony’s biggest problem “is people who are afraid to find the person who would be the right person for them.” Then again, Mr. Warren’s comments on a recent web video leave us feeling a little less warm-and-fuzzy:

“I have said that eHarmony really oughtto put up $10 million and ask other companies to put up money and do a really first class job of figuring out homosexuality. At the very best, it’s been a painful way for a lot of people to have to live. But at this point, at this age, I want America to start drawing together. I want it to be more harmonious.” The man is highly anti gay and believe is a disease that can be cured if every body puts it’s minds and money to together for a cure.

The video is part of CNBC’s “Off the Cuff” series, which is billed as a chance for viewers to get to know corporate executives “outside the boardroom,” and is presented as a monologue, sans interviewer questions.

And while eHarmony has been sued in the past for discriminating against gay users, it’s hard to what kind of “figuring out” Mr. Warren is proposing. An attempt to build a better gay dating site? An initiative to deprogram those people once and for all? Something having to do with robots?

EHarmony Inc., the operator of a website designed to help guide singles into happy marriages, is ending some relationships of its own.

At age 78, Neil Clark Warren, who founded the company 12 years ago, is taking back control. Since becoming chief executive officer in July after a series of CEO changes, he’s fired 100 people, cut the board from nine to two and bought back stock from Sequoia Capital and Technology Crossover Ventures, which invested $110 million in 2004.

At age 78, Neil Clark Warren, who founded the company 12 years ago, is taking back control. Since becoming chief executive officer in July after a series of CEO changes, he’s fired 100 people, cut the board from nine to two and bought back stock from Sequoia Capital and Technology Crossover Ventures, which invested $110 million in 2004.

{Sales growth has slowed from 16 percent in 2008 to 6.3 percent in 2010 and an estimated 3.8 percent this year to $275 million, according to IBISWorld. EHarmony doesn’t disclose its finances.}

An initial public offering, which had been expected in 2010, is now off the table and Warren said in an interview he has no interest in selling the Santa Monica, California-based company. Instead, the trained theologian and psychologist will spend next year building EHarmony’s portfolio to add services that help people find the right job, understand themselves and build relationships to reduce loneliness. Gone from the company are the business degrees, and in are social scientists.

“Building a relationship business is so different from trying to build something with machines or widgets,” said Warren, who’s been chairman of EHarmony’s board from the beginning. “To put it in the hands of people that only want to look at it as a source of business success, revenue success doesn’t make sense anymore.”

Not that Warren views EHarmony and its $60 monthly subscriptions as a nonprofit. If run correctly, he says the company can be worth $1 billion in two years and $5 billion in five years. With 14 percent of the U.S. dating-services market, the company trails onlyIAC/InterActiveCorp, (IACI) parent of Match.com, which has 24 percent, according to industry researcher IBISWorld.

Warren at 78 now has control and ownership of EHarmony, and he plans to stick around for at least five years. That’s how much time he has to build a $5 billion company with an unconventional approach. He’s confident he can do it.

NYT: According to psychologists at eHarmony, an online company that claims its computerized algorithms will help match you with a “soul mate.” But this claim was criticized in a psychology journal last year by a team of academic researchers, who concluded that “no compelling evidence supports matching sites’ claims that mathematical algorithms work.”

~~~~~~~~~~

Adam Gonzalez on this blog: The man (Neil Clark) has a strong point in the way he gets couples' together. It’s a mash up of what is offered today by any other dating company plus the ex Revered Moon norma, in which couples meet the day they are to get married and not know each other before (I said the idea). In this company couple seekers are not aloud to do the searchers themselves, EHarmony gets them together, they do the searching and matching. The love seekers do the $paying$ and giving out his/hers information. Maybe that is the secret. Sometimes we don’t know what is good for us. Sometimes we are afraid to be honest. We need a match maker like in the Yiddish tradition. How do you explain a person who everyone considers a good catch with all the looks one can wish for coupled with a cousin of Notre Dame’s infamous man of the bells? It happens all the time.

Where they(EHarmony) went array is when they mixed it up with religion and the bia’s that religion has ingrained in it’s self otherwise it wouldn’t be a religion. What I mean is, in known religions there is always is got to be them and us, good and bad and nothing in between. When you tell millions you wont serve them because they are sick and don’t deserve in that condition to be coupled you are going to the deep ends. Another good idea thought out by a charlatan like Neil Clark is certainly has the traits of a Henry Ford who built the model T and started the factory idea of the past generation by one person screwing the same nut over and over until they went mad. This little part of the assembly doing the same thing over and over again and today having computers taking over the men and women. Henry Ford can be called the father of the industrial revolution. Yet he was a very ugly individual in admiration with the political idea of Narcism (Nazis) and other not noble ideas. He never gave importance to the single individual but the combine effort of the many ( You could call it communism almost except he was a capitalist the one not to share unless it has many returns).

EHarmony a good idea of having the match made in codes thought of by a bigot and homophobe not by a Gandhi.

January 7, 2013

] Meet Jacob, a thirtysomething, single Portlander on the prowl. He describes himself as “average-looking.” Girlfriends have called him “lazy, aimless, and irresponsible with money.” He doesn’t care much about “a solid credit score,” “a 40-hour workweek,” or settling down. Thanks to online dating sites, Jacob pursues dates with “one or two very pretty, ambitious women a week.” He recently ended a two-year relationship with a 22-year-old; he’s currently juggling flings with “a paralegal and a lawyer who work at the same law firm, a naturopath, a pharmacist, and a chef.”

Jacob, as Atlantic writer Dan Slater frames him, is the embodiment of a new dating market where the allure of “online romance is threatening monogamy.” Whenever he meets another woman online, Jacob (not his real name) thinks: “This person could be exclusively for me, but so could the other two people I’m meeting this week.” Why have a real relationship, Slater asks, when there are so many attractive, successful partners waiting online?

I don’t know—maybe because we're not all aimless and lazy thirtysomething straight dudes? Jacob may be meeting a buffet of sexy professionals and college students through his online dating profiles, but those women are meeting … Jacob. Slater doesn’t interview the paralegal, the lawyer, the naturopath, the pharmacist, the chef, or the twentysomething about their experiences dating online. They might speak to an alternate narrative of online dating: This Jacob could be exclusively for me, but so could the other two Jacobs I’m meeting this week—Oh, God. Why settle down when there are so many other unsuccessful, unattractive partners with whom you could make a horrific, lifelong mistake?

Alexis Madrigal has already administered a takedown of Slater’s central assertion that online dating has turned plugged-in yuppies into commitment-phobes. Marriage will live on, no matter how valiantly Jacob scams on women. I’m actually glad to finally hear from a Jacob, the male counterpoint to Kate Bolick’s own Atlanticexamination of “All the Single Ladies” who end up paired, impermanently, with guys like him. The problem is that, unlike Bolick, whose story of singledom is intrinsically tied to her gender, Jacob scoots by in this story with no examination of his maleness. Slater relegates gender to a parenthetical: “Gender, too, may play a role.” Then, he fails to interview a single woman in the piece. Instead, he presents as evidence quotes from male online dating executives who say stuff like, “I often wonder whether matching you up with great people is getting so efficient, and the process so enjoyable, that marriage will become obsolete.”

Let us set aside the bizarre assertion that marriage has survived until now, as an institution, because it is so fun and that anything that is more fun threatens its very existence. Let us instead examine this notion that online dating is an "enjoyable" experience. My own stint dating online produced: one date with a guy who believes he is haunted by ghosts; three messages from a man who ended the series by writing, “P.S.: you're so fucking hot i would lick the poop out of your butthole just to touch your ass”; an aggressive messenger I never met but have twice had to stealthily avoid when ducking into my local Trader Joe’s; bland drinks with perfectly OK dudes; many Jacobs.

No, online dating is not a joy. It is a horrific den of humanity that sometimes seems even less fun than actually being married. But it is kind of funny and interesting, mostly because it throws the offline dating economy into stark relief. Jacobs exist in real life, too, staring glaze-eyed at women a decade their junior from across the sports bar. Paging through all of their photos, assembled in one place, never made me feel like my world was teeming with compatible singles. Maybe that’s because I’m a woman, or maybe because, like most men and women who are not Jacob, I'm looking for a little more compatibility than “inexperienced person who will agree to watch sports and have sex with me.” Jacob may view online dating as an endless font of nubile young women to invite into his hovel (for a time), but I see it more as a reminder that a good person is hard to find, off or online. Either way, I think that most people are unlikely to conclude, “I like him, but wait—there are so many other quality men waiting for me … online.”

October 21, 2012

As a whip-wielding dominatrix, she played the only woman capable of seducing the emotionally detached Sherlock Holmes.

Now life is imitating fiction for actress Lara Pulver, who has struck up an ‘affectionate’ relationship with Benedict Cumberbatch, who played the troubled detective in BBC1’s latest adaptation.

The pair, both 36, radiated an on-screen chemistry in the sexually charged episode A Scandal In Bohemia, in which Pulver appeared naked as Irene Adler.

And last Thursday they were openly flirtatious when they attended the Specsavers Crime Thriller Awards together.

Cumberbatch brought his former co-star along as his ‘plus one’ as he collected the Best Actor award.

Another guest at the bash at Grosvenor House hotel on London’s Park Lane said: ‘They were completely engrossed with each other, taking photographs, holding hands, cuddling and laughing. Lara was following Benedict around the room.

They were very affectionate together and Lara even tweeted a photograph of Benedict with his award.’

Pulver, who divorced US actor Joshua Dallas last year, has previously been linked to another co-star, Raza Jaffrey, 36.

They worked together on BBC1’s Spooks.

Meanwhile, Harrow-educated Cumberbatch said of Sherlock’s on-screen chemistry with seductress Irene: ‘Is there a sexual element to it? Without a doubt there is.

But … it’s a game of chess, and it’s a very cruel, cruel game of love, if it is love.’

The New Year’s Day episode attracted 100 complaints for its raunchy scenes, but BBC drama boss Ben Stephenson said: ‘Just because you’re on pre-watershed doesn’t mean you have to be dull.’

Cumberbatch, who previously dated actress Olivia Poulet for 12 years, recently admitted he is seeking a new love.

He said: ‘I’m building a home at the moment and it would be nice to fill that home with love and life and children.’

Last night, Lara’s spokesman said ‘No comment’, while a spokesman for Cumberbatch did not return calls.

The Forest Needs help

Adamfoxie Blog Int. (Click the Fox-please)

Adam Gonzalez, Publisher

ONE 💔

ONE (RED) Join The Campaign Vs.AIDS

Free for Nonprofit

If you are known non-profit dealing with LGBT health issues, world hunger, and some health issues in general, We will give you a free spot showing in all 13 pages of this site. You can contact the publisher at adamfoxie@Gmail.comWe reserve the right to choose how this nonprofit fits this media blogging site